1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to a system for distributing images to appropriate image analysts. Particularly, the present invention is directed to a queuing system for processing images.
2. Description of Related Art
A variety of image sorting and distribution systems are known in the art for medical Diagnostic Imaging. Of such systems, many are directed to tele-radiology.
The multi-modality medical field of Diagnostic Imaging has a history dating back to the late 19th Century when Wilhelm Conrad Roentgen discovered an unknown energy he termed “X-rays.” Advances in medicine and technology over the past 100 years have resulted in a wide variety of imaging modalities such as radiography, fluoroscopy, mammography, computerized tomography (“CT”), ultrasound (“US”), magnetic resonance imaging (“MR”), nuclear medicine (“NM”), bone densitometry, and interventional & angiographic procedures. In the past, images were printed and stored in large file rooms. Today, images may be stored digitally in a Personal Archiving and Communication System (“PACS”) and viewed on a computer monitor, printed, or may be digitally transmitted electronically for image analysis and interpretation. The presently accepted data format is called Digital Imaging and Communication in Medicine (“DICOM”). The field of diagnostic image transmission, coined “tele-radiology,” initially referred to image transmission across standard telephone lines. With recent advances in high-speed data transmission technology, these images can be transmitted, for example, via Wide Area Networks (“WANs”), Local Area Networks (“LANs”), or Virtual Private Networks (“VPNs”) in fractions of seconds.
There has been an exponential surge in medical diagnostic imaging information over recent years—a trend that is likely to continue to accelerate. As of July 2005, the population of the United States was an estimated 295 million, with approximately 78 million “baby-boomers.” As the population increases both in quantity and age, so does the number of medical visits and hence diagnostic imaging examination requests. Likewise, as approximately 30% of all healthcare related dollars are spent in the last 3 months of life, the number of diagnostic imaging examinations is accelerating. According to the American College of Radiology, there were approximately 400 million examinations performed in the United States alone in 2001.
With technological advances, especially in multi-detector CT scanners (acquiring up to 256 channels of information simultaneously as well as 3-dimensional generated sagittal and coronal reformats), and new advances in MRI sequences, the number of images acquired per examination continues to increase. Advances in CT and MR angiography have largely replaced the invasive conventional catheter based angiography, and also generate a large number of images. These pose problems for data storage, data transmission, imaging analysis and image interpretation. The number of radiologists in the United States has not been increasing at the same rate of population growth and therefore there is a relative shortage of radiologists. Hence, a referring physician's request for a timely interpretation for the diagnostic imaging study of their patient is sacrificed because of decreased throughput. The term “wet-read” originally referred to a radiologist's interpretation of a radiographic film that was still wet from the film processor and had not had a chance to dry. Today, the term “wet-read” refers to a referring physician's request for any rapid interpretation. While most Emergency Room and Urgent Care Facility generated examinations are appropriately ordered as wet-reads, an increasing number of non-emergent/non-urgent cases have been labeled “wet-read” because of referring physician impatience due to backlogged cases and decreased radiologist throughput. The problem then becomes one of prioritizing the cases properly.
Radiologists in the United States are physicians who have performed radiology residency, some with additional fellowship training allowing for sub-specialization. The American Board of Radiology (“ABR”) has rigorous certification procedures that qualify radiologists to interpret these examinations. After completing and passing a series of written examinations, a radiologist becomes “board eligible.” Then, a scrupulous oral examination determines “board certification.” Continuing medical education requirements ensure the radiologist maintains knowledge on par with advances in technology. As mentioned above, there is a relative shortage of radiologists in the United States. Some proposed solutions include utilizing non-board certified radiologists or by outsourcing the images to non-US based radiologists for analysis. However, radiologists outside the United States are not held to the same high rigorous standards of the ABR and therefore quality may be sacrificed. Additionally, the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule excludes from payment those services that are performed outside of the United States (such as radiographic interpretation).
Most facilities in the United States are not on a completely digital PACS based format, although this is quickly becoming the trend. Large file rooms are being replaced by high capacity computer hard drives which occupy less space and are able to be referenced rapidly without ancillary staffing. In the facilities that do employ a PACS system or are networked for tele-radiology, typically a few radiologists may be responsible for analyzing all cases performed regardless of their sub-specialization. Thus, the most appropriate radiologist may not be interpreting the examination. There is the potential for the sacrifice of quality, and possible erroneous interpretation. Further imaging evaluation may be recommended when unnecessary, may be omitted from recommendation when it should be appropriate, or may be misdirected to an incorrect next best appropriate examination. Improper patient care and subsequent lawsuits may result, with subsequent depositions and court time further removing the radiologist from the act of reading those cases that the radiologist is most suited to read.
Such conventional methods and systems generally have been considered satisfactory for their intended purpose. However, these systems have room for improvement. As evident from the related art, there still remains a continued need for a system capable of matching appropriate image analysts with appropriate images. There also remains a need in the art for a system that can prioritize images to be analyzed in proper order by appropriate image analysts, while being simple and inexpensive to make and use. The present invention provides a solution for these problems.